Decision search


What's this ?
  • Organisation
  • Decision type

  • Reference number
  • Date range

     

  • Sort Results

Show advanced search

Your search has 53231 results

  • London Borough of Camden (24 020 535)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Homelessness 25-Aug-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council considered Mr X’s homelessness application. Mr X had the right to seek a review of homelessness decisions, and then to appeal to the county court on a point of law. We consider it reasonable for him to have used this right. We will not investigate the rest of Mr X’s complaint about accommodation offered to him under the Council’s social housing allocation scheme. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council, or a significant enough injustice, to justify an investigation.

  • Calderdale Metropolitan Borough Council (24 021 082)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Special educational needs 25-Aug-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate Mr F’s complaint about the alleged failure to deliver special educational provision in his son’s education, health and care (EHC) plan because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council, and we cannot achieve the outcome Mr F wants.

  • Wirral Metropolitan Borough Council (24 021 866)

    Statement Upheld Special educational needs 25-Aug-2025

    Summary: Miss X complained the Council did not provide her child with a suitable education for three years. She says this caused her child to miss out on education and impacted their wellbeing. We find the Council at fault which caused injustice. We are satisfied the remedy offered by the Council remedies the injustice caused.

  • Birmingham City Council (24 022 402)

    Statement Not upheld Other 25-Aug-2025

    Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to properly assess his child’s home education. We cannot investigate this complaint. This is because Mr X is now engaged in court proceedings with the Council. We cannot investigate matters that are before a court.

  • City of Wolverhampton Council (24 023 395)

    Statement Upheld Licensing 25-Aug-2025

    Summary: Mr X complained the Council delayed processing his application to renew his private hire taxi vehicle licence causing him to miss out potential earnings. The Council was at fault for a minor delay in approving Mr X’s application. The Council agreed apologise to Mr X to acknowledge the distress and frustration this caused.

  • Birmingham City Council (25 000 743)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Antisocial behaviour 25-Aug-2025

    Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about the Council’s response to antisocial behaviour complaints. We have no remit to consider the Council’s actions in connection with its management of its social housing. Of the remaining element, further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

  • London Borough of Hammersmith & Fulham (25 001 309)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Private housing 25-Aug-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the enforcement of housing conditions in a privately rented property and inadequate support during an eviction. This is because the complaint is late.

  • Leicester City Council (25 001 533)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Safeguarding 25-Aug-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the outcome of safeguarding enquiries. Further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

  • Walsall Metropolitan Borough Council (25 002 339)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Assessment and care plan 25-Aug-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s contribution to an assessment for Continuing Healthcare funding. This is because further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

  • Bupa Care Homes (CFC Homes) Limited (25 002 354)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Residential care 25-Aug-2025

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Care Provider’s failure to properly respond to an incident involving Mr X and another resident. This is because an investigation would be unlikely to lead to a worthwhile outcome.

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Privacy settings